Rajasthan Court December 1987 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Surajbhan Vs. Sadul Textiles
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-15-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj164; 1988(1)WLN247; 1988(1)WLN663
M.C. Jain, J.1. This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment and decree dated 13th Dec. 1972 whereby the plaintiffs suit was dismissed with costs holding that the suit is barred by time as the period taken in litigation at Delhi cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.2. I may state a few relevant facts necessary for the disposal of the present appeal.3. The plaintiff Surajbhan instituted the suit against the defendants on 13th March,1958 in the court of Senior Sub-Judge at Delhi which was registered as No. 95 of 1958. The suit was for the recovery of damages amounting to Rs. 11,880.10 Annas. Before the filing of that suit a suit for permanent injunction was filed in the court of Sub-Judge Delhi but the same was allowed to be withdrawn by the order dated 27th Dec. 1957 with the permission to bring a fresh suit on the same cause of action. According to the plaintiff the cause of action arose at Delhi in July 1956 when the agreement took place subsequently on 1st Ju...
Pema Ram S/O Mana Ram and 2 ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-14-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN659
K.S. Lodha, J.1. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned P.P. and also the learned Counsel for the complainant.2. This is a third application for bail. The first application was rejected by this Court on 12-5-1987. By that time the eye-witnesses had not been examined. The second application was also, rejected by this court on 11-9-1987, because at that stage also, the position had not changed. It was, however, observed that all the eye-witnesses should be examined by the trial court on the next date of hearing positively. Now two of the eye-witnesses have been examined on 24-11-1987. The third eye-witness has still not been examined. Therefore, this fresh application has been filed.3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and the learned P.P. and having regard to the material on record, I am of the opinion that the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.4. I, therefore, direct that the petitioners Pemaram, Allaram and Sonaram shall be released on bail on ea...
Sohan Lal Vs. Nathmal and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Raj183; 1988(1)WLN237
M.C. Jain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the District Judge Banswara dated 24th March, 1976 whereby the plaintiff-respondent Nathmal's suit under Order 21, Rule 63 C.P.C was decreed. The defendant appellant had obtained a decree against the defendant 2 Naginlal S/o Nathmal. The plaintiff decree-holder Shri Sohan Lal in execution of the decree got a house attached in respect of which an objection petition was filed under Order 21, Rule 58 C.P.C. by the object or Nathmal but the same was dismissed. Hence he filed the suit under Order 21, Rule 63 C.P.C. with the allegations that the site over which the house was constructed by the plaintiff, was purchased by his grand father Keshvaji vide Patta No. 40 of 1911 Niti 10 Samvat year 1967. Out of that land, land measuring 8 feet was given to Jotkaran S/o Keshvaji and over the rest of the land the plaintiff constructed the house in the year 1941. His son Naginlal never remained in possession of the house...
Puriya Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988WLN(UC)45
J.R. Chopra, J.1. This jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated March 28, 1987 of the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore where by the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant Puriya of the offences under Sections 304 Part-II and 324 IPC and has sentenced him to four years rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default, further undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 Part-II, IPC and to one month's rigorous imprisonment under Section 324 IPC. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: that on 28-10-1985, at about noon, accused Puriya armed with an axe was going on the way near the Bus Stand. Mst. Kankoo was also coming on that way. She was a widow. Accused Puriya thought that he has met a widow while going to his sacred work which according to him was a bad omen and, therefore, he has inflicted a...
Banshidhar Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN270
P.C. Jain, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner, Bansidhar, seeks to challenge the order dated 4th May, 1987, passed by respondent No. 2, where by he has been placed under suspension in exercise of the powers available under Section 17(4A) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (for short, the Act) on the sole ground that a criminal case regarding FIR No. 56/84, Police Station Jhotwara involving an offence under Sections 167, 466, 467, 468 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code is pending against him in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, No. 7, Jaipur City, Jaipur.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Nangal Jesa-Bohra. He was elected in the year 1981. Earlier, also, the petitioner was Sarpanch of the said Panchayat and was elected in the year 1978. On 17th April, 1984, FIR No. 56/84 was registered at the Police Station, Jhotwara, After investigation, a challan was filed and the case is pending in the Court of the Additio...
Mohan Chandnani Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN634
Farooq Hasan, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated April 18, 1978 passed by the Special Judge (ACD) Rajasthan Jaipur whereby the appellant Mohan Chandnani had been convicted and sentenced as under:Under Section 161, IPC Section -- to undergo simple imprison5(1)(d)(2) of the Prey -- ment for one year for bothIntion of Corruption -- counts and to pay a fine ofAct, 1947 -- Rs. 200/- on each count indefault one month's S.I.2. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are thus: On May 30, 1975, Panne Singh, the complainant lodged a report before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, (Anti-corruption Department), Ajmer, stating therein that he was having an electric connection at his well, electricity consumption charges demanded vide bills issued by the Rajasthan State Electricity Board were to be paid through the Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Kishangarh, Ajmer; the bills were to be issued by the Assistant Eng...
Jagdish and ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN541
J. Chopra, J.1. The revision is directed against the order of the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi dated May 15, 1986 whereby the learned Magistrate, while rejecting the final report given by the Police after investigation, has taken cognizance against the accused-petitioners Jagdish, Dalpat, Maina, Meena and Kanchan under Section 323, IPC. It is alleged that before these orders were passed accepting or rejecting the final report, the complainant put in appearance through this counsel and he was heard.2. Mr. Singhvi appearing for the accused-petitioners has submitted that when a final report is submitted by the Investigating Officer after investigation and if that final report is to be rejected and cognizance is to be takeu against some persons then for the ends of justice, these persons have also a right to be heard and cognizance should be taken against them only after affording them an opportunity of hearing. In this respect, he placed reliance on a decision of this Co...
Nemi Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN585
S.N. Bhargava, J.1. The present petition has been referred to this Bench as the learned Single Judge before whom this case came for decision, felt that the following important question of law is involved in this petition:Whether an order framing charge against the accused persons is an interlocutory order within the meaning of Section 497(2), Cr.PC and if so, in what circumstances?2. The Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment (Central Bureau of Investigation), Jaipur submitted a charge-sheet against the accused petitioner Nemi Chand in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.B.I. Cases), Jaipur, who after hearing arguments, framed charge against the accused petitioner under Section 420, IPC. Being aggrieved by the order framing charge against the petitioner, the petitioner preferred a revision petition in the court of Sessions Judge, Jaipur District, Jaipur who rejected the same on the ground that no revision petition was maintainable under Section 397(2), ...
Mishri Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 1988(1)WLN654
S.S. Byas, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus, the petitioner challenges his detention under the National Security Act, 1980 (here in after to be referred to as 'the Act' or 'NSA').2. As per averments disclosed in the petition, the petitioner was arrested on March 21, 1987 in a proceeding under Sections 107 & 151, Cr. PC and also for violating the prohibitory order issued by the District Magistrate, Bhilwara under Section 144, Cr. PC. The City Magistrate passed an order on the same day releasing him from custody on his furnishing bail bonds. He furnished the bail bonds, but before he could be released from jail, the District Magistrate, Bhilwara issued order Annexure-15 on March 24, 1987 for the detention of the petitioner under Section 3 of the NSA. The grounds of detention were communicated to him after much delay on April 17, 1987. The petitioner made representation before the State Government, which was rejected. Hi...
Uchhab Kanwar and ors. Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Dec-11-1987
Reported in: 2(1988)ACC165
A.K. Mathur, J.1. This is an appeal against the award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur dated 4-6-1981 whereby a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been awarded as compensation with 6% per annum interest w.e.f. 3-3-1979. Aggrieved against this award, the claimants have filed the present appeal for suitable enhancement of the award.2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 13-10-1978 Hanuwant Singh aged about 30 years was travelling in the Rajasthan State If Road Transport Corporation's Bus bearing No. RRM 1078 from Ladnu to Deedwana. This bus got over-turned and deceased Hanuwant Singh died on account of this accident. The dependents of deceased Hanuwant Singh filed a claim petition before the Tribunal and claimed a sum of Rs. 1,97,000/- as compensation. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation, on the ground that on account of the death of the deceased his agricultural farming would lie suffered and since his minor son is 3 years and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »